Davis v. FEC: Closing the Road to Washington for Joe the Plumber

Sameer Vadera

In Davis v. FEC, the Supreme Court of the United States considered whether the financing regulatory scheme contained in Section 319(a) of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (“BCRA”) violated a self-financing candidate's First Amendment rights. The Court held that the asymmetrical contribution limits that Section 319(a) imposed on candidates campaigning for the same seat in the United States House of Representatives impermissibly burdened the self-financing candidate's freedom of speech. In so holding, the Court incorrectly applied strict scrutiny to Section 319(a)'s contribution limits, instead of the “closely drawn” standard that prior case law established. By failing to apply the “closely drawn” standard to the Act's contribution limits, the Court increased barriers for non-wealthy candidates running for political seats by (1) failing to protect fair and competitive elections and (2) jeopardizing public funding as a viable method for clean elections. Had the Court applied the “closely drawn” scrutiny standard to Section 319(a), it would have validated effective campaign finance reform that treats the concerns of corruption in politics.